Why Nullification?

How does a nation of sovereign people who believe in the fundamental principles of liberty, create a government that will not infringe on the natural rights of the creators of such a government?

Let me take you on a brief history lesson to explain.

This federal system of government we created came on the heels of a revolutionary war with Britain.  The framers of the constitution and the founding fathers through tedious debate, took great care to craft a constitution that would guard against the infringement of personal liberty by their government.

According to the Declaration of Independence, men establish governments to secure their pre-existing natural rights. Where there is no government, rights are easily threatened by others, since the coercive power of the state does not function as a deterrent. The purpose of government is, therefore, to create the conditions that allow each individual to freely exercise his rights. At the collective level, this amounts to what the Declaration of Independence calls the “safety and happiness” of the people. Legitimate government must not only secure rights but also arise out of the consent of the governed.

The consent of the governed is the standard by which a government’s legitimacy is judged.

“Governments are instituted among Men…deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

Since all men are created equal, no individual or group has an inherent right to rule over anyone else. The only way anyone can have the authority to govern his equals is if they consent to his rule. A government not based on consent would unjustly deprive its citizens of the fundamental right to liberty.

The framers understood this to be the most important task of the government they set forth to create.


Cheerleader or Jeerleader?

I’m hearing a lot of ruckus about the presidential election.  People on the left blindly defending Barack Obama; people on the right blindly criticizing him.  I have heard plenty of stories on this topic.

Amongst them

“We need to do a recall”

“Sign this petition to secede”

“Obama is the savior of the middle class”

“Yes We Can”

I’m sick of it from both sides.

The truth stands alone.  Barack Obama is one in a long list of horrible presidents.  His total disregard for the Constitution and our liberty is without question.

And let’s be honest, Romney wasn’t going to be much better.

Since the election, Republicans and Democrats alike have done very little to advance the cause of liberty.  Both red and blue governors are still playing politics, even when the voters in their states have clearly spoken out on the issues such as healthcare, medicinal and recreational use of marijuana, indefinite detention, the TSA, and many other issues.

Pundits continue to regurgitate media propaganda, argue issues of who’s right and who’s wrong and why, and use outlandish insults and claims to generate buzz and inflate their own agenda driven ego’s.  The only problem is…they have no agenda.

Politicians are not interested in solving any problems.


Why do we keep giving the federal government our money?

“People have been brainwashed. People have been told that you need this income tax system to fund government, which is absolutely ridiculous. My question is that if that is true, then how did we fund government from 1776 to 1913.” – Peter Gibbons, Tax Attorney.

I can’t even count the number of false arguments I have heard to defend the federal governments collection of federal income tax.  Among them….

“Who’s going to pay for the highway system?”

“What about our public schools?”

“We have to support our military!”

“What about traffic lights and stop signs, and street signs”

Let’s just pretend for a minute that all of these are constitutional programs that the federal government has the authority to fund.  Doing some research I found that…

Schools are paid for by property tax.

Highways are paid for by gasoline tax.

Military is paid for by corporate tax.

Sales taxes pay for an array of local needs, including traffic signals.

Incidentally, the program that most conservatives critique, the federal welfare program, is paid for by Social Security tax.  One unconstitutional program, paying for another.

Let’s examine history for a moment and find out why our federal income tax is so high, and how it became so out of control.


Andrew Cuomo, Get a Clue!

Gov. Andrew Cuomo is requesting $30 billion in federal aid to rebuild after Superstorm Sandy, which heavily damaged parts of New York City and Long Island.

“The administration will seek a supplemental appropriation to cover infrastructure, repair and emergency costs beyond those normally covered by federal emergency aid.”

Cuomo  added…

“I’ve asked for 100 percent reimbursement, The equity and the fairness is inarguable in this case, It will probably be a regional plan including New Jersey and Connecticut, with money for infrastructure, housing, local governments and small business.”

Generally, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will reimburse up to 75 percent of public costs, with the state and local authorities covering the remaining 25 percent. There have been cases, such as Hurricane Katrina, where the federal government has reimbursed up to 90 percent of costs.

DEAR GOVERNOR, you should dry the water from behind your ears, wipe the milk from your mouth and realize you are playing big boy games now, the kind your dad used to play. And your motives are as transparent as his were.  You’re apparently trying to set a precedent, not only for your state, but all of the other states, to rely completely on the federal government to solve all of their problems.


Georgia Blocks Health Care Exchanges

In a letter to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Friday, Georgia Governor Nathan Deal informed secretary Kathleen Sebelis Georgia’s intent regarding the Affordable Care Act. “As you know, I remain concerned with the one-size-fits-all approach and high financial burden imposed on states by this federal mandate” The state of Georgia will not…


Missouri Statehouse Fails Voters

The Missouri Health Care Exchange Question was on the November 6, 2012 ballot in the state of Missouri. The measure prohibits the establishment, creation, or operation of a health insurance exchange unless it is created by a legislative act, a ballot initiative, or veto referendum.

The ballot summary of the measure has been under scrutiny, with legislative figures who support the measure stating that the summary, provided by the Missouri Secretary of State, was misleading to voters.

State Senator Rob Schaaf commented…

“It’s totally playing politics, and it’s lying to the voters.”

Missouri Secretary of State spokesman Ryan Hobart countered,

“This office has always followed our legal obligation to provide Missourians with fair and sufficient summaries of ballot initiatives, and this summary is no different.”

Senator Schaaf, is a Doctor, and a director of the Missouri Doctors Mutual Insurance Co. which stands to benefit from the government subsidies of a national healthcare plan.

So now who’s playing politics?


Missouri says NO to Health Exchanges

On Tuesday, the people of Missouri voted on The Missouri Health Care Exchange Question. This is a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment offered to voters as a ballot measure.

A legislatively-referred constitutional amendment is a limited form of direct democracy, in this case a voter determined nullification.

The ballot summary reads as follows….

Shall Missouri Law be amended to prohibit the Governor or any state agency, from establishing or operating state-based health insurance exchanges unless authorized by a vote of the people or by the legislature?

The measure passed overwhelmingly and is now an amendment to the Missouri State Constitution.

61% – YES
38% – NO

Gov. Jay Nixon acknowledged Thursday that Missouri will not be able to set up an online marketplace for residents to shop for health insurance as envisioned under President Barack Obama’s health care plan.

Nixon exclaims…


Hickenlooper insults his voters

On November 6th, after Colorado’s election numbers came in and solidified that Colorado was the first state to legalize marijuana for recreational use, Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper made this statement…

“The voters have spoken and we have to respect their will. This will be a complicated process, but we intend to follow through. That said, federal law still says marijuana is an illegal drug so don’t break out the Cheetos or gold fish too quickly.”

Hey Governor, here’s some news… Federal Law only trumps state laws in cases where the power has been delegated to the Feds in the Constitution.

This would include running the post office, delivering the mail, and other limited powers spelled out in the Constitution. For the federal government to distort the meaning of the Supremacy Clause to make it seem like they have the power to do anything they like is the definition of a tyranny.